I have some deep concerns with what is happening under the hood here
with the archive bit. I'm hoping someone will step up to the plate and
give the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth on this matter
in clear and unambiguous language. Specifically:
1) Is there a known configuration where a Samba file server is fully
integrated into an ADS domain (2003) where the setting of the archive
bit functions as expected (i.e. set on editing of a file) for all
applications--most notably MS Word?
2) Is it expected and acceptable behavior for files modified by MS
Office to remove ACL information (as reported by getfacl) when modifying
a file despite inherit permissions, inherit acls, map acl inherit, nt
acl support, acl compatibility, store dos attributes and dos filemode
all specifically being set in smb.conf and acl and user_xattr being
configured in fstab for the filesystem?
The reason I have concerns is that it seems that the more I dig into the
list archives, the more I see people asking related questions
(specifically about the archive bit) with no clear resolution given. For
example:
http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2004-March/082935.html
A reply dodging the problem is given here :
http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2004-March/082946.html
Which was followed up by a workaround here:
http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2004-March/082949.html
Here we have an old thread discussing the issue involving both Word 97
and Excel 97:
http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2000-April/018559.html
There didn't seem to be any responses to that inquiry that I can find
quickly.
Going back as far as 1998, we can see mention of the problem here:
http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba-ntdom/1998-August/001682.html
Jeremy Allison responded with this potential solution:
http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba-ntdom/1998-August/001687.html
It isn't clear if this was a solution to the archive bit issue or
another issue the parent poster was having.
I am just hoping that someone steps up to the plate and clears the
ambiguity once and for all. Either Samba correctly handles the archive
bit or it doesn't. If this is an issue with MS Word only (which is what
I think I'm seeing), what is the issue and is anyone working on it?
I feel like I'm chasing my tail on this. I realize you guys are busy,
that I'm using Samba without charge and that Microsoft has been less
than forthcoming on adequately documenting their software, but I need
some insight. Can anyone provide some?
By the way, thanks to all that have helped so far. I've learned a
tremendous amount about Samba in a very short period of time. I'm just
hoping desperately that this issue can be resolved. The alternative is
rather unpleasant to think about (i.e. replacing Samba with a
Windows-based file server).
Thanks,
Aaron Kincer
